Because I can only subject my poor friends and family to my political rantings and ravings for so long.

Monday, December 05, 2005

"By the way guys - I'm still a bigot. Just thought I'd remind you."

Okay. I can agree that people who did not support changing the definition of marriage last summer were not all bigots. The fact is, many people who have no real problem with gays just didn't agree with the logic, and were perfectly happy to use civil unions instead. I disagree, but I can deal with that. One is not necessarily homophobic for holding such a position.

This lunatic, on the other hand, is. Pat O'Brien, who is known to most people as the Liberal who bolted over same-sex marriage - definitely a one-issue kind of guy to be sure - is continuing to fight the fight that no one wants to fight. After the bill was passed, 55% of Canadians agreed that the issue was closed and should not be opened again. That number has probably gone up, as people have moved on with their lives and realized that it's not a big deal. Only about 1/3 of those polled - coincidentally, the same number of people who opposed both marriage and civil unions - agreed that the debate should be re-opened.

These guys are really having a difficult time facing the facts. The issue is closed, and they lost. Turning back the clock never works. The most Pat O'Brien's efforts could accomplish would be to force the Supreme Court to overturn the traditional definition of marriage. They have lost on every front - political, judicial, and public opinion. Yet they keep on fighting in the name of intolerance, hatred, and all the things that Canadians have been working for the last few generations to purge from our society, as embarassing reminders of our racist, homophobic and intolerant past.

Let's be perfectly clear about this. Pat O'Brien does not consider gays to be equal. He has said as much in the House of Commons during the debate. Tory MP Rona Ambrose said she considers gays to be of equal worth, and O'Brien stood up to object to this. And here is where the difference is outline - Rona Ambrose opposed same-sex marriage, but that does not make her a bigot. Pat O'Brien's inability to abide Ambrose's "outrageous" declaration of moral equality is what makes him a bigot.

He is endorsing Stephen Harper on one issue and one issue alone: same-sex marriage. That is what makes him a bigot.

He voted no-confidence in the government on one issue - same-sex marriage. That is what makes him a bigot.

He is pathologically obsessed with denying gays equal status in our society, to the point where he is willing to fight a losing battle over and over again, until he gets his way, and the clock is turned back. That is what makes him a bigot.

Michael Bliss pointed out in his book "Right Honourable Men" that attempting to turn back the clock is an exercise in futility, and that people don't like clock-turners, citing this as a reason for the poor Conservative performance during the King and St. Laurent years. He is completely right. The issue has been settled. Just like after desegregation was implemented in the United States, there remained pockets of resistance. This is to be expected. The best way to deal with those pockets of bigotry and hatred is to marginalize them, the same way we marginalize the racists and the anti-semites, so to should we marginalize the homophobes. They have no place in a civilized, tolerant society, and it's time they knew that they are no longer in charge.

2 Comments:

Incredibly hypocritical coming from the lad who, one day into the campaign, said he wouldn't vote for the Conservatives entirely due to the fact that Harper put the SSM issue out on the table quickly (to avoid the "hidden agenda" spin). Harper supports civil unions for homosexuals, something you just said you could understand. Yet you were mortally offended when Harper restated what he has been very clear on ever since this debate opened. Quite hypocritical indeed.

"He is endorsing Stephen Harper on one issue and one issue alone: same-sex marriage. That is what makes him a bigot."

Pat has never endorsed Harper for leadership of our country. He has congratulated him on his moderate stance on marriage, but Pat's goal is quite different. Pat has created his movement to get "pro marriage" MP's elected from coast to coast in the January 23rd election. He has made the movement non-partisan, as 'pro marriage' promotes candidates regardless of their party. Though, obviously, the Libs and Conservatives will have the majority of them.

And simply the fact that you can't tolerate voices of dissent (on this -one- issue) in the Liberal party shows how intolerant you are yourself. This issue is obviously important to Pat, just as it is to you, you just come from different sides.

You tend to be all for freedoms as long as they are complimentary to your own vision of Canada. And you seem to have little to no tolerance for people who disagree with your narrow-minded views.